Thursday, March 20, 2008

NOAA [National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration] published two charts for February both showing variances from normal:

[CLICK ON IMAGES FOR LARGER VIEW]

My own sampling of various cities and towns in the Northeast showed similar variances to the Departure from Normal chart because they were based on the same "normal" baseline ... 1971 to 2000.

Based on my sampling, I'd guess that NOAA uses some sort of smoothing technique? when drawing the Departure from Normal map [middle] because our suburban Detroit area had over a -4°F average variance from normal [click on map immediately above], but on the Departure from Normal it is shown in the 0 to -2 range.

What caught my eye was the difference between the Climate at a Glance and the Departure from Normal maps. Here in Michigan, most people will say that this February was very similar to those in the early 70s when temperatures seemed colder than "normal." Yet the Climate at a Glance shows Michigan as "near normal'. What is different is that NOAA uses temperature records going back to 1895 for their climate analysis and records going back to 1971 for their normal baseline.

NOAA also states that they use adjustment techniques for the temperatures used in the normal calculation, but I'm not sure if those same techniques go back to the 1895 data used in the calculation of the other normal.

Regardless, I was curious about what constituted normal for the Climate at a Glance maps, so I did a quick sampling of February temperatures for Michigan at the decade breaks and came up with this:

While the sampling average of 20.5° F may not be Michigan's actual overall average for 1895-2008, there is an interesting pattern that shows an oscillation more than a trend. I have argued this point before when looking at the pattern of the number of statewide high temperature records for the nation. I acknowledge that this is a small sampling, but it seems to be in agreement with other looks at U.S. climate reporting.

Furthermore, what is the criteria for NOAA stating that a particular month's average temperature is near normal versus above normal or below normal? ......What's Normal?

How, for example, can a month that is barely out of the lower third of recorded averages [Feb. 2008 - 41 of 114 is 36th percentile] be "near normal" on a scale that includes 7 categories?

If we start the temperature series in 1930 instead of 1895 or 1971 [cold points] would our perception of normal and trend be different? The obvious retort is that we use the earlier starting point because we happen to have data going back to the 1890s and it just happens to be a colder period.

Then why have two starting points and why 1971... also a colder period? Why not 1951... a more normal time?

[ILLUSTRATIVE DATA ONLY]

If we use raw data instead of adjusted data would the results be markedly different?

If we insist on the same weather stations for the entire period used in the calculation of normal, would the results be different?

If all weather stations had to be maintained to official specifications, would the results be different?

Other thoughts...

One might ask if the increasing impact of Urban Heat Island [UHI] effect has caused an overstatement... over 113 years... in the average temperatures being reported. There are a lot of sources who say that it has.

Even a 1° increase in reported temperatures due to small towns becoming suburbs and suburbs becoming part of large cities may have a significant impact in the analysis of what is normal. Remember... temperatures will be cooler in the outlying areas, in case you haven't heard that lately on your local weather forecasts.

Meanwhile, today's forecasted high around here is 38°F ... about 12° below the normal high temperature... but we might have some above normal temperatures by the end of the month. Oh, and after years of high sunspot activity, the sunspots are virtually absent... and el Nino's warmth has turned into la Nina's cold. Just more of the same changes that happened before.

But that's normal.

What doesn't seem normal is panic about a possible [but questionable] trend change of 1° over 100 or so years... or spending trillions of dollars to prevent a possible cause of a possible change.

... The Government is on course for an embarrassing showdown with the European Union, business groups and environmental charities after refusing to guarantee that billions of pounds of revenue it stands to earn from carbon-permit trading will be spent on combating climate change.

Tracking Interest Rates

FEDERAL RESERVE & HOUSING

SEARCH BLOG: FEDERAL RESERVE for full versions... or use the Blog Archive pulldown menu.

February 3, 2006 Go back to 1999-2000 and see what the Fed did. They are following the same pattern for 2005-06. If it ain't broke, the Fed will fix it... and good!August 29, 2006 The Federal Reserve always acts on old information... and is the only cause of U.S. recessions.December 5, 2006 Last spring I wrote about what I saw to be a sharp downturn in the economy in the "rustbelt" states, particularly Michigan.March 28, 2007

The Federal Reserve sees no need to cut interest rates in the light of adverse recent economic data, Ben Bernanke said on Wednesday.

The Fed chairman said ”to date, the incoming data have supported the view that the current stance of policy is likely to foster sustainable economic growth and a gradual ebbing in core inflation”.

July 21, 2007My guess is that if there is an interest rate change, a cut is more likely than an increase. The key variables to be watching at this point are real estate prices and the inventory of unsold homes.August 11, 2007 I suspect that within 6 months the Federal Reserve will be forced to lower interest rates before housing becomes a black hole.September 11, 2007It only means that the overall process has flaws guaranteeing it will be slow in responding to changes in the economy... and tend to over-react as a result.September 18, 2007I think a 4% rate is really what is needed to turn the economy back on the right course. The rate may not get there, but more cuts will be needed with employment rates down and foreclosure rates up.October 25, 2007 How long will it be before I will be able to write: "The Federal Reserve lowered its lending rate to 4% in response to the collapse of the U.S. housing market and massive numbers of foreclosures that threaten the banking and mortgage sectors."November 28, 2007 FED VICE CHAIRMAN DONALD KOHN

"Should the elevated turbulence persist, it would increase the possibility of further tightening in financial conditions for households and businesses," he said.

"Uncertainties about the economic outlook are unusually high right now," he said. "These uncertainties require flexible and pragmatic policymaking -- nimble is the adjective I used a few weeks ago."http://www.reuters.com/

"The odds of a recession are now above 50 percent," says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com. "We are right on the edge of a recession in part because of the Fed's reluctance to reduce interest rates more aggressively." [see my comments of September 11]

January 7, 2008 The real problem now is that consumers can't rescue the economy and manufacturing, which is already weakening, will continue to weaken. We've gutted the forces that could avoid a downturn. The question is not whether there will be a recession, but can it be dampened sufficiently so that it is very short.January 11, 2008 This is death by a thousand cuts.January 13, 2008 [N.Y. Times]

“The question is not whether we will have a recession, but how deep and prolonged it will be,” said David Rosenberg, the chief North American economist at Merrill Lynch. “Even if the Fed’s moves are going to work, it will not show up until the later part of 2008 or 2009.”

January 17, 2008 A few days ago, Anna Schwartz, nonagenarian economist, implicated the Federal Reserve as the cause of the present lending crisis [from the Telegraph - UK]:

The high priestess of US monetarism - a revered figure at the Fed - says the central bank is itself the chief cause of the credit bubble, and now seems stunned as the consequences of its own actions engulf the financial system. "The new group at the Fed is not equal to the problem that faces it," she says, daring to utter a thought that fellow critics mostly utter sotto voce.

January 22, 2008 The cut has become infected and a limb is in danger. Ben Bernanke is panicking and the Fed has its emergency triage team cutting rates... this time by 3/4%. ...

What should the Federal Reserve do now? Step back... and don't be so anxious to raise rates at the first sign of economic improvement.

Individuals and businesses need stability in their financial cost structures so that they can plan effectively and keep their ships afloat. Wildly fluctuating rates... regardless of what the absolute levels are... create problems. Either too much spending or too much fear. It's just not that difficult to comprehend. Why has it been so difficult for the Fed?

About Me

Air Force (SAC) captain 1968-72. Retired after 35 years of business and logistical planning, including running a small business. Two sons with advanced degrees; one with a business and pre-law degree. Beautiful wife who has put up with me for 4 decades.
Education:
B.A. (Sociology major; minors in philosopy, English literature, and German)
M.S. Operations Management (like a mixture of an MBA with logistical planning)

U.S. Statewide Temperature Records

High and Low temperature extremes - updated through 2011. These records establish the climate boundaries for each state and are shown by decade of occurrence. If a previous record is tied, the most recent occurrence is counted and the previous occurrence is dropped... a slight bias toward later decades. SOURCE DATA

You Get The Government For Which You Voted

Blame the people who voted for the person who nominate that person who will be confirmed by the people who were elected by the people who simply didn't understand what was meant by a "pig in the poke." Or, to put it another way, "... we have to pass the bill [confirm the nominee] so that you can find out what is in it [her mind]...."

via www.patdollard.com

What's Your Plan?

New Definition Of Constitutional Law

Together with Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan's confirmation would represent a shift toward a younger, changing court, one that values experiences outside the courtroom and emphasizes personal interactions as much as deep knowledge of the law.
The Washington Post

Current Weather

When will the economic turnaround occur?

Until business perceives that the government is not going to continually change the rules of the game, there will be a reluctance to commit resources and hire people. And until that happens, the economy will languish.

The government is trying to push the economy higher with mandates, taxes, and higher spending; but it needs the private sector to pull it higher with real demand.

The Obama administration is open to the idea of taxing the wealthiest Americans to pay for healthcare reform, health secretary Kathleen Sebelius suggested yesterday as the House of Representatives prepares to incorporate such a plan in its draft healthcare bill.

In the spirit of Thomas Jefferson, legislative information from the Library of Congress [THOMAS]

"There is danger from all men.The only maxim of a free governmentought to be to trust no man living with powerto endanger the public liberty." - John Adams

"An enlightened citizenry is indispensable for the proper functioning of a republic. Self-government is not possible unless the citizens are educated sufficiently to enable them to exercise oversight." - Thomas Jefferson

We would have been richer had there been no nature-induced recession

“North American temperatures would have been considerably colder in 2008 had there been no human-induced warming influence present,” Perlwitz said.
[Source]

Ironic Words

March 2007

The science is settled, Gore told the lawmakers. Carbon-dioxide emissions — from cars, power plants, buildings and other sources — are heating the Earth's atmosphere.

Gore said that if left unchecked, global warming could lead to a drastic change in the weather, sea levels and other aspects of the environment. And he pointed out that these conclusions are not his, but those of a vast majority of scientists who study the issue.

Members of the committee, Democrats and Republicans alike, listened very carefully to Gore, as they seemed to take to heart his final message: that in a few years this whole debate will look very different.

"This is not a partisan issue, this is a moral issue," Gore said. "And our children are going to be demanding this."

Climate Forcings - Consensus Without Knowledge?

Just Disregard The Sun Above Your Heads... It's The CO2 You Produce

As of Sept. 15, the current solar minimum ranks third all-time in the amount of spotless days with 717 since 2004. There have been 206 spotless days in 2009, which is 14th all-time. But there are still more than 100 days left in the year, and Perry expects that number to climb. Perry, who studies sunspots and solar activity in his spare time, received an undergraduate degree in physics at Kansas State University and a Ph.D in physics and astronomy at The University of Kansas. He also has spent time as a meteorologist.